From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Subject: Re: KVM call agenda for 2013-05-28
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 10:43:46 -0500
Message-ID: <87mwrbqhn1.fsf@codemonkey.ws>
References: <20130523124132.GA18596@redhat.com> <20130528235309.GA31648@morn.localdomain> <20130531023426.GB18156@morn.localdomain> <CAFe8ug--stQH7KW7Bzy7+eSsZ5W-9T4PtU7xpOfsozAd9kt5vA@mail.gmail.com> <51A88D73.1090302@redhat.com> <87bo7rmhbp.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <1370009305.5141.95.camel@i7.infradead.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>,
	Jordan Justen <jljusten@gmail.com>,
	Kevin O'Connor <kevin@koconnor.net>,
	Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
	KVM devel mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	qemu-devel qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	seabios@seabios.org, ddutile@redhat.com,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-qa0-f54.google.com ([209.85.216.54]:47230 "EHLO
	mail-qa0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751746Ab3EaPnu convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 31 May 2013 11:43:50 -0400
Received: by mail-qa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id hu16so570211qab.6
        for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Fri, 31 May 2013 08:43:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1370009305.5141.95.camel@i7.infradead.org>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> writes:

> On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 08:04 -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>=20
>> <soapbox>
>>=20
>> Fork OVMF, drop the fat module, and just add GPL code.  It's an easi=
ly
>> solvable problem.
>
> Heh. Actually it doesn't need to be a fork. It's modular, and the FAT
> driver is just a single module. Which is actually included in *binary=
*
> form in the EDK2 repository, I believe, and its source code is
> elsewhere.
>
> We could happily make a GPL=C2=B9 or LGPL implementation of a FAT mod=
ule and
> build our OVMF with that instead, and we wouldn't need to fork OVMF a=
t
> all.

So can't we have GPL virtio modules too?  I don't think there's any
problem there except for the FAT module.

I would propose more of a virtual fork.  It could consist of a git repo=
 with
the GPL modules + a submodule for edk2.  Ideally, there would be no nee=
d
to actually fork edk2.

My assumption is that edk2 won't take GPL code.  But does ovmf really
need to live in the edk2 tree?

If we're going to get serious about supporting OVMF, it we need
something that isn't proprietary.

> --=20
> dwmw2
>
> =C2=B9 If it's GPL, of course, then we mustn't include any *other* bi=
nary
> blobs in our OVMF build. But the whole point in this conversation is
> that we don't *want* to do that. So that's fine.

It's even more fundamental.  OVMF as a whole (at least in it's usable
form) is not Open Source.  Without even tackling the issue of GPL code
sharing, that is a fundamental problem that needs to be solved if we're
going to serious about making changes to QEMU to support it.

I think solving the general problem will also enable GPL code sharing
though.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori